Search

Southern politics has confounded scholars of elections, parties, and representation since the publication of V.O. Key’s seminal book in 1949, Southern Politics in State and Nation. How to make sens...

State governments have experimented with a variety of election laws to make voting more convenient and increase turnout. The impacts of these reforms vary in surprising ways, providing insight into the mechanisms by which states can encourage or reduce turnout. Our theory focuses on mobilization and distinguishes between the direct and indirect effects of election laws. We conduct both aggregate and individual-level statistical analyses of voter turnout in the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections. The results show that Election Day registration has a consistently positive effect on turnout, whereas the most popular reform-early voting-is actually associated with lower turnout when it is implemented by itself We propose that early voting has created negative unanticipated consequences by reducing the civic significance of elections for individuals and altering the incentives for political campaigns to invest in mobilization. dvocates, journalists, and politicians frequently propose changes to election laws out of the belief that making voting easier will increase voter turnout. It seems logical that making voting more convenient-through relaxed registration rules, registra­ tion on Election Day, voting prior to Election Day, or ex­ panded absentee voting-will encourage more people to cast ballots. We challenge this notion and show that the most popular reform-early voting-actually decreases turnout when implemented by itself, an unanticipated consequence that has significant implications for policy and for theories of how state governments can influence turnout. This result is counterintuitive, and it certainly runs against the grain of conventional wisdom. Our expla

Andrew Rehfeld's The Concept of Constituency argues for a fundamental rethinking of the relationship between constituents and politicians. This is a creative and original argument that deserves serious discussion. Before participating in that discussion, I would like to take a small detour to address the broader significance of this symposium: the collaboration between normative theorists and an empirical scholar on an issue of mutual interest. Far too often political theorists and empirical scholars do not engage each other's work and it is even more unusual for them to be co-authors. In my book on race and representation I included a chapter that explored the implications of the political theory literature on representation for my work.1 My work was enriched by the ideas and arguments of scholars such as Anne Phillips, Will Kymlicka, Iris Young, Lani Guinier, Amy Gutmann, and Charles Taylor. At the same time, empirical political scientists have much to offer political theorists. In some cases it may be as simple as offering systematic evidence in support of a normative argument, as Katherine Tate, David Lublin, Kenneth Whitby, Carol Swain, and I have done (among many others) with questions of the "politics of presence" and the value of descriptive representation. In other cases, empirical scholars may provide the technical know-how to bring an idea to life, as with the collaboration between Robert Luskin and James Fishkin on deliberative polling. This forum takes this type of interaction between normative and empirical scholars one step further by directly engaging one another. Rehfeld makes two central contributions: he separates the concept of constituency from the method of voting and he points out the weaknesses of

For the past 20 years, congressional scholars have focused a great deal of attention on describing and explaining the impact of political parties in Congress. Much of this effort has tackled the pr...

The goal of empowering minorities through redistricting has been attacked from all sides. The Supreme Court recently called the North Carolina redistricting plan "political apartheid" (Shaw v. Reno 1993) while critics on the left reject the approach because it merely provides descriptive rather than substantive representation (Guinier 1991a, 1134-53). This article offers a new perspective from which to assess the viability of this approach to black empowerment: the supply side of redistricting. Using a unique data set from the 1972, 1982, and 1992 congressional elections in black districts, we examine how individual politicians respond to the changing electoral context imposed by new district lines and how, in turn, their decisions shape the electoral choices and outcomes in a given district. We argue that individual politicians acting in their own self-interest may tip the balance of electoral power to black and white moderates in the district. We find that this outcome prevails in approximately half of ...

In this article I explore the impact of the new Black-majority House districts on the power of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) and the nature of Black representation in those districts. These districts are controversial, largely because they are viewed as an embodiment of a "politics of difference" (i.e., Blacks must represent Blacks), rather than a "politics of commonality." My preliminary research contradicts this common view. I conclude that (a) the new size of the CBC has substantially increased its political clout while simultaneously pushing it into the political mainstream; and (b) newly elected African Americans in Congress are more likely to promote the politics of commonality than the politics of difference. These conclusions are based on an examination of the CBC's role in passing legislation, their patterns of roll call voting, committee assignments, and participation in the Democratic party leadership.

Bacon, Donald C., Roger H. Davidson, and Morton Keller. The Encyclopedia of the United States Congress. New York: Simon and Schuster. Pp. Iviii, 2359 (4 volumes). $355.00 hardbound. Congressional Quarterly. Guide to U.S. Elections, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1994. Pp. xii, 1543. $229.00 hardbound. Congressional Quarterly. National Party Conventions, 1831-1992. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1995. Pp. vii, 301. $28.95 softbound. Congressional Quarterly. Presidential Elections, 1789-1992. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1995. Pp. viii, 274. $28.95 softbound. Goehlert, Robert U. and Fenton S. Martin. The United States Congress: An Annotated Bibliography. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1995. Pp. xxix, 640. $185.00 hardbound. Makinson, Larry and Joshua F. Goldstein. Open Secrets: The Encyclopedia of Congressional Money and Politics, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1994. Pp. xi, 1362. $169.95 hardbound. Makinson, Larry and Joshua F. Goldstein. The Cash Constituents of Congress, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1994. ...

The 2010 elections produced the largest number of political amateurs elected to Congress in more than sixty years. This article will examine both the popular fascination with amateur candidates and the scholarly interest in political careers. Specifically, I will discuss celebrity politicians, amateurs who become celebrities because of their unusual campaigns, the impact of the Tea Party, and the implications of the large class of amateurs for ambition theory and the strategic-politicians hypothesis.

Why do hundreds of amateurs challenge entrenched U.S. House incumbents every two years? Previous work offers a range of explanations, from naivetd to love of politics. The most systematic study of this question concluded that amateurs challenge incumbents because it maximizes their chances of being elected to the House. This article argues that distinctions must be drawn between "ambitious" and "experience-seeking" amateurs because no single theory can explain amateurs' motivations. Ambitious amateurs respond to favorable district and national conditions in their decision to run, like their experienced counterparts, while experience-seeking amateurs do not.